Our tax structure is what's stuck in the past

In her Nov. 5 letter, Megan Park of McCandless asks why Pittsburgh is unable to contribute more funding to its libraries, and describes the city's current funding as "paltry" and "an insult."

The sad truth is that much of the city's money is going to subsidize things that Ms. Park and other suburban residents use but never pay for. All of the region's major hospitals, stadiums, museums, theaters, universities and highways, along with many of the regional parks and trails, are on city of Pittsburgh land and pay little or nothing in taxes. City taxpayers must pay for the streets, lights, sidewalks, maintenance, snow removal, police and fire protection, paramedic services and a thousand other things so those institutions and attractions are available to Megan Park and the region, yet Ms. Park and the region do not share our burden equitably. Even the main branch of the Carnegie Library, which serves the entire region, occupies a major chunk of high-value real estate in Oakland but pays no taxes to the city.

Ms. Park urges the city to move from 1895 to 2009. The suburban growth of the past century, with more than half of the county's population now living outside the city and getting its regional amenities for free or nearly free, means that our taxing structure is what needs to leave 1895.

MARK T. FATLA
Allegheny West

The writer is executive director of the Northside Leadership Conference.

They're a bargain

I urge the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh board not to conclude that Pittsburgh has too many libraries ("CMU Study That Spurred Library Service Cuts Released Today," Nov. 3). Most cities should have such a "problem," since other studies (such as the 2006 Carnegie Mellon-led economic impact study) have shown that public libraries improve the economy, community morale, education and safety of their areas.

In fact, if you were to figure out how to improve these qualities in a neighborhood without a library, can you think of one building that could provide them more efficiently than a public library, while freely welcoming all ages and income brackets under one shelter? I can't. To me, that makes each branch a bargain, not a burden.

I applaud the efforts of politicians like Luke Ravenstahl, Chelsa Wagner, Patrick Dowd and Doug Shields to recognize that our public libraries are some of the community assets that will help keep Pittsburgh a great place to stay and an attractive place to move to. Pittsburgh is the birthplace of the public library system as America knows it, and we should stand proudly on the forefront of supporting our public libraries with a permanent funding solution for both library services and the beautiful, historic buildings that house them.

The library budget gap amounts to only $4 a head for residents in the city limits. Can't we work together and find a way to keep Pittsburgh a city abundant with libraries and the learning, culture, information and community they provide us?

KAREN LILLIS
Oakland

The writer is a library science student and University of Pittsburgh intern at the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh-Main Reference Services.

Not fair, not smart

The proposed "Fair Share Tax" is Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's solution to Pittsburgh's financial crisis, but the premise that college students are not paying their fair share is misleading ("Ravenstahl Defends His Proposal for Tuition Tax," Nov. 11).

In 2005, the Pittsburgh Council on Higher Education estimated $3 trillion as the economic impact of their 10 member schools. The University of Pittsburgh students alone contributed $388.7 million in expenditures to the local economy last year. Playing host to huge tax-exempt institutions may be a thorn in the city's side, but taxing the students "privileged" to attend school here would have far-reaching consequences.

My Pittsburgh-purchased college education cost me approximately $50,000. A 1 percent tax on that tuition would have taken $500 out of my pocket. That is $500 that I would be spending on movies in the SouthSide Works, breakfast at Pamela's or tickets to the Penguins game. That is the same $500 that could pay for my cell phone bill for the entire year or almost two months' rent.

Maybe 1 percent doesn't sound like much, but for cash-strapped college students this is the difference between attending a Pittsburgh school or not. If the city approves this budget we will be the only one in the nation to tax college tuition, effectively neutralizing Pittsburgh's attractiveness in the exceedingly competitive market of higher education.

Given the rhetoric regarding the importance of retaining students after graduation, the effort to push a "Fair Share Tax" on this particular group because they choose to be educated here doesn't seem smart or fair.

SARA DeMARCO
McCandless

Shallow howls

Hurray for Mayor Luke Ravenstahl for his tuition tax proposal! Colleges and universities have for too long abused their tax-exempt status while acting as for-profit entities. They keep buying property and reducing the city tax base, using their taxpayer-subsidized growth to justify even higher tuition rates.

Predictably, the colleges will howl that the tax will "hurt" the students. Schools can mitigate this "grave" injury by keeping their own tuition increases to less than the inflation rate. And if they really are concerned about their lower-income students, they can request that the mayor charge based on tuition minus college grants. That will reduce the burden on poorer students while providing even more incentive for the universities to assist them.

The liberati at the schools -- who have for years suggested taxes on everyone but themselves -- should note that students have better facilities and standards of living (pools, gyms, theaters, food, etc.) than all but the richest people in this country. Surely a small tax on this largesse is appropriate and can only be embraced by those who so want to "tax the rich."

Twenty-five years ago, Dick Cyert at Carnegie-Mellon told a group of us students that "Every time we raise tuition, we get more applicants, and we get more money per applicant. There is no way we will reduce tuition." So his descendants can bury this 1 percent rate into their next tuition increase and hope that he's still right.

STEVE PAFF
Aspinwall

Can't wait to respond to our letter writers? Go to community.post-gazette.com/blogs.

We welcome your letters. Please include your name, address and phone number, and send to Letters to the Editor, 34 Blvd. of the Allies, Pittsburgh 15222. E-mail letters to letters@post-gazette.com or fax to 412-263-2014. Letters should be 250 words or less, original and exclusive to the Post-Gazette. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity and accuracy and will be verified before being published.

Town Talk, a discussion forum on issues of the day, is featured exclusively in the Opinion section on PG+, a members-only web site from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Our introduction to PG+ gives you all the details.